<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1986 (10) TMI 164 - CEGAT,  BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72609</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the appeal for non-deposit of the penalty amount under Section 116 of the Customs Act, emphasizing the mandatory nature of depositing penalties pending appeal. It highlighted the necessity for the Appellate Collector to provide an opportunity for the appellants to be heard before rejecting the appeal. The Tribunal clarified that the Collector could waive the deposit requirement in cases of undue hardship but stressed the need to consider revenue interests. The matter was remanded to the Deputy Collector for reassessment of the penalty imposition based on new evidence presented, allowing for a refund claim to be considered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 17:22:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110888" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (10) TMI 164 - CEGAT,  BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72609</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the dismissal of the appeal for non-deposit of the penalty amount under Section 116 of the Customs Act, emphasizing the mandatory nature of depositing penalties pending appeal. It highlighted the necessity for the Appellate Collector to provide an opportunity for the appellants to be heard before rejecting the appeal. The Tribunal clarified that the Collector could waive the deposit requirement in cases of undue hardship but stressed the need to consider revenue interests. The matter was remanded to the Deputy Collector for reassessment of the penalty imposition based on new evidence presented, allowing for a refund claim to be considered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>